Top 10 shipyards/countries by order book (LNG/containers)
The global shipbuilding order book for liquefied natural gas (LNG) carriers and container ships has reached record or near-record levels in 2024–2025, driven by an energy-transition-fuelled LNG fleet expansion and a structural upsurge in container shipping capacity requirements. This ranking measures shipyards by their combined order book in Compensated Gross Tonnage (CGT) — the industry standard metric that weights vessel complexity, not just raw size — covering both LNG carrier and container ship contracts as of end-2024 data, used as a 2025 snapshot.
Together, LNG carriers and container ships account for roughly 45–50 % of the total global shipbuilding order book by value, making them the two most commercially significant vessel categories in the current newbuilding cycle. Three countries — South Korea, China, and Japan — share over 95 % of global capacity in these segments.
Figures are based on Clarksons Research, UNCTAD, and national industry data, rounded and harmonised for cross-yard comparability. They serve analytical purposes and should not be treated as an official industry release.
(LNG + containers, 2024)
global order book
among top 10 yards
Top 10 shipyards at the frontier of the LNG & container order book
The Top 10 is dominated by South Korean and Chinese yards, which collectively hold over 85 % of the ranked order book. South Korean yards lead in LNG carrier complexity and unit value, while Chinese yards excel in container ship volume and have rapidly closed the LNG technology gap. Japan's yards appear from rank 7 onward, with a stronger presence in container ships than in LNG.
The world's largest shipbuilder by CGT, HD HHI commands the top position across both segments. Its Ulsan complex — the single largest shipyard facility on earth — routinely delivers over 30 vessels per year. The yard's LNG carrier expertise spans GTT membrane technology and its proprietary Hi-ME-GI dual-fuel propulsion. A substantial portion of the backlog consists of 174,000–180,000 m³ LNG carriers contracted by major energy companies and national oil companies for long-term supply projects. The container ship pipeline includes a mix of ultra-large (24,000+ TEU) and feeder-sized vessels for Asia–Europe and transpacific trades.
Samsung Heavy Industries (SHI) is the acknowledged global leader in the most complex LNG project variants, having pioneered LNG-FPSO and FSRU construction. Its Geoje yard carries one of the highest-value per-CGT backlogs in the industry, with LNG carriers consistently priced above $250 million per unit. SHI was an early mover in dual-fuel container ships and has secured significant Ultra-Large Container Vessel (ULCV) contracts for leading European and Asian liner operators.
Formerly Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering (DSME), Hanwha Ocean was rebranded in 2023 after Hanwha Group's acquisition. The change of ownership injected fresh capital and strategic direction, enabling a rapid recovery of order intake. Hanwha Ocean posted the highest year-on-year order book growth among the top three Korean yards (+15.3%), reflecting strong demand for its LNG carrier product line and renewed interest from global liner companies. Its X-DF (Cross-linked Dual-Fuel) two-stroke engine series has become a standard propulsion choice for new LNG carrier orders.
China's premier shipyard for both LNG carriers and ultra-large container ships, Jiangnan is the crown jewel of the China State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC) group. Its new Changxing Island facility is purpose-built for large complex vessels. Jiangnan has secured multiple contracts for 24,000+ TEU container ships and is rapidly building competence in large LNG carrier construction, supported by strategic technology transfer agreements and China's domestic LNG import programme driving state-backed orders.
Hudong-Zhonghua is China's designated LNG carrier specialist, having delivered China's first domestically built LNG carrier and since amassed the deepest LNG construction experience on the Chinese mainland. Its order book now includes vessels for major Chinese energy importers including CNOOC, JOVO, and ENN, as well as export orders for Middle Eastern and European buyers. Year-on-year growth of +18.6% underscores China's accelerating push to reduce reliance on South Korean yards for LNG fleet renewal.
China's largest listed private shipbuilder has emerged as one of the fastest-growing yards globally. Yangzijiang's container ship backlog spans a wide range from mid-size 7,000–14,000 TEU vessels to growing large-ship contracts. The yard has pivoted aggressively into dual-fuel (LNG-powered) container ships, capturing demand from liner operators seeking compliance with IMO 2030/2050 decarbonisation targets. Its entry into LNG carrier construction marks a significant strategic shift in 2023–2024.
Japan's largest shipbuilder by output and the highest-ranked Japanese yard on this list. Imabari's strength lies in its standardised, efficiently produced mid-size and large container ships with a reputation for reliable delivery and fuel efficiency. The yard has formed a strategic alliance with Japan Marine United, giving combined scale competitive with Chinese peers. LNG carrier exposure remains limited compared to Korean counterparts, but Imabari is investing in ammonia-ready and dual-fuel designs for the next generation of orders.
The shipbuilding arm of COSCO Shipping, one of the world's largest shipping groups, benefits from captive demand within its parent company's fleet renewal programmes as well as external orders. Its yards in Nantong, Guangzhou, and Dalian together hold a significant container ship backlog, with growing exposure to dual-fuel propulsion variants. The vertically integrated nature of the COSCO group provides a stable pipeline of orders through economic cycles.
A subsidiary of the Sinopacific Offshore & Engineering group, New Times Shipbuilding has rapidly scaled its position in container ship construction, particularly in the 7,000–13,000 TEU range favoured by regional and secondary line operators. The yard's double-digit growth trajectory reflects China's broader capture of mid-size container ship orders, a category where Korean yards had historically been stronger. New Times is also among the first second-tier Chinese yards to receive LNG carrier orders.
An affiliate of HD Hyundai, Hyundai Mipo Dockyard (HMD) specialises in mid-size vessels: product tankers, car carriers, medium-sized container ships, and small- to-medium LNG carriers. Its position in the top 10 reflects growing demand for smaller LNG bunkering vessels and coastal LNG carriers, a market segment driven by port decarbonisation policies and gas infrastructure build-out across Southeast Asia and Europe.
Table 1. Top 10 shipyards by combined LNG & container order book, 2025 snapshot
| Rank | Shipyard | Country | Specialisation | Order Book (M CGT) | YoY Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | HD Hyundai Heavy Industries | South Korea | Diversified | 8.42 | +12.4% |
| 2 | Samsung Heavy Industries | South Korea | LNG-focused | 6.18 | +8.7% |
| 3 | Hanwha Ocean | South Korea | LNG-focused | 5.34 | +15.3% |
| 4 | Jiangnan Shipyard (CSSC) | China | Diversified | 4.76 | +22.1% |
| 5 | Hudong-Zhonghua (CSSC) | China | LNG-focused | 4.12 | +18.6% |
| 6 | Yangzijiang Shipbuilding | China | Container-focused | 3.89 | +31.4% |
| 7 | Imabari Shipbuilding | Japan | Container-focused | 3.21 | +5.2% |
| 8 | COSCO Shipping Heavy Industry | China | Container-focused | 2.98 | +19.8% |
| 9 | New Times Shipbuilding | China | Container-focused | 2.67 | +28.3% |
| 10 | Hyundai Mipo Dockyard | South Korea | Diversified | 2.43 | +9.1% |
CGT = Compensated Gross Tonnage. Figures rounded to two decimal places. Source: Clarksons Research, company disclosures, harmonised end-2024 data.
Chart 1. Order book (M CGT) for the Top 20 shipyards, LNG & containers
Bars represent combined LNG carrier and container ship order book in million CGT as of end-2024. Top 20 yards shown in descending order. Source: Clarksons Research / company data.
Full Top 20: order book distribution across leading shipyards
Beyond the top 10, the order book landscape broadens to include second-tier Chinese yards, Japanese specialists, and Singapore's engineering hub. The top 20 yards collectively represent approximately 90 % of the global combined LNG and container ship order book by CGT. Chinese yards account for 9 of the 20 ranked entries, reflecting the speed at which China has diversified its shipbuilding base beyond bulk carriers and tankers into higher value-added vessel categories.
Table 2. Top 20 shipyards by combined LNG & container order book (end-2024)
Global total (LNG + container, all yards): ~65.0 M CGT. Share % = shipyard CGT ÷ 65.0 M CGT × 100.
| Rank | Shipyard | Country | Specialisation | Order Book | YoY |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | HD Hyundai Heavy Industries | South Korea | Diversified | 8.42 M CGT 12.95% | +12.4% |
| 2 | Samsung Heavy Industries | South Korea | LNG-focused | 6.18 M CGT 9.51% | +8.7% |
| 3 | Hanwha Ocean | South Korea | LNG-focused | 5.34 M CGT 8.22% | +15.3% |
| 4 | Jiangnan Shipyard (CSSC) | China | Diversified | 4.76 M CGT 7.32% | +22.1% |
| 5 | Hudong-Zhonghua (CSSC) | China | LNG-focused | 4.12 M CGT 6.34% | +18.6% |
| 6 | Yangzijiang Shipbuilding | China | Container-focused | 3.89 M CGT 5.98% | +31.4% |
| 7 | Imabari Shipbuilding | Japan | Container-focused | 3.21 M CGT 4.94% | +5.2% |
| 8 | COSCO Shipping Heavy Industry | China | Container-focused | 2.98 M CGT 4.58% | +19.8% |
| 9 | New Times Shipbuilding | China | Container-focused | 2.67 M CGT 4.11% | +28.3% |
| 10 | Hyundai Mipo Dockyard | South Korea | Diversified | 2.43 M CGT 3.74% | +9.1% |
| 11 | Dalian Shipbuilding (DSIC) | China | Diversified | 1.84 M CGT 2.83% | +16.7% |
| 12 | Japan Marine United | Japan | Container-focused | 1.72 M CGT 2.65% | +4.8% |
| 13 | Oshima Shipbuilding | Japan | Container-focused | 1.61 M CGT 2.48% | +6.1% |
| 14 | Guangzhou Shipyard (CSSC) | China | Diversified | 1.47 M CGT 2.26% | +14.2% |
| 15 | Wuchang Shipbuilding | China | Diversified | 1.31 M CGT 2.02% | +11.9% |
| 16 | Sembcorp Marine | Singapore | Diversified | 1.18 M CGT 1.82% | +8.6% |
| 17 | Mitsui E&S Shipbuilding | Japan | Container-focused | 1.09 M CGT 1.68% | +3.2% |
| 18 | Hyundai Samho Heavy Industries | South Korea | Diversified | 0.97 M CGT 1.49% | +5.8% |
| 19 | Shanghai Waigaoqiao (CSSC) | China | Container-focused | 0.89 M CGT 1.37% | +17.4% |
| 20 | NACKS (COSCO-Kawasaki) | China | Container-focused | 0.76 M CGT 1.17% | +21.3% |
Source: Clarksons Research, UNCTAD, company disclosures. Data as of end-2024. CGT = Compensated Gross Tonnage. All figures rounded and harmonised for comparability.
Chart 2. Order book size vs year-on-year growth — top 20 shipyards, 2024
The scatter plot illustrates the relationship between order book volume and momentum. South Korean yards occupy the top-right cluster (large order books, steady growth), while several Chinese yards appear in the upper-left quadrant (smaller absolute backlogs but very high growth rates), suggesting that China's challenge to South Korea's dominance is still a story in motion, not a completed transition.
Horizontal axis: order book in million CGT. Vertical axis: year-on-year change in order book (%). Hover over a point to identify the yard. Source: Clarksons Research / company data.
Methodology: how this ranking is constructed
This ranking measures shipyards by their combined order book in Compensated Gross Tonnage (CGT) for two vessel types: LNG carriers (of all sizes, including FSRUs and small-scale LNG ships) and container ships (of all TEU classes, including dual-fuel variants). CGT is used rather than raw Gross Tonnage (GT) or number of vessels because it weights each vessel by construction complexity, making it the standard international metric for comparing yards of different sizes and product mixes.
Data sources
Primary data from Clarksons Research Shipping Intelligence Network, supplemented by UNCTAD Maritime Transport Review 2024, national shipbuilding associations (KSA, CANSI, SAJ), and company investor relations disclosures.
Reference period
Order book figures reflect vessels contracted and under construction but not yet delivered, as of 31 December 2024. This is used as the primary 2025 snapshot, since full-year 2025 newbuilding data are not yet finalised.
CGT conversion
CGT coefficients follow the standard OECD/Paris MOU formula: CGT = GT × coefficient, where the coefficient varies by vessel type (e.g., ~0.36 for large container ships, ~0.45–0.55 for LNG carriers). Figures are rounded to two decimal places.
Scope and coverage
The ranking covers 20 shipyards with measurable LNG or container ship order books. Yards that build LNG carriers as a very minor sideline to naval or cruise construction are excluded. Yard groups with multiple facilities are consolidated at the legal-entity level unless their subsidiaries independently market order intake.
YoY comparison
Year-on-year change is computed as the percentage difference between the end-2024 and end-2023 order book for the same scope of vessel types. It reflects net intake (new orders minus cancellations minus deliveries during the year).
Limitations
Privately negotiated contracts may not be reflected in publicly available databases until registration. CGT is an output metric, not a value metric: a $350 M LNG carrier and a $150 M container ship may carry similar CGT weights. Orders under construction for state-owned domestic buyers in China may be under-reported in international databases.
Key methodological note for readers:
- All figures are estimates harmonised for comparability and should not be cited as official statistics.
- The CGT of individual yards may differ slightly from figures published by the yards themselves, which sometimes use gross tonnage or alternative counting conventions.
- Figures for China-based yards may understate the actual order book if state-directed contracts are not yet formally logged in international registries.
Analytical insights: what the 2025 order book ranking reveals
1. The Korean-Chinese duopoly — and its internal tensions
South Korea and China together account for roughly 85 % of the combined LNG and container ship order book. But the nature of their dominance differs sharply. South Korean yards hold a near-monopoly on the most technically complex LNG carriers — the 174,000– 180,000 m³ two-stroke membrane-type vessels that form the backbone of global LNG trade — because no other country currently has the workforce skills, materials supply chain, and regulatory certification to build them at volume. The three leading Korean yards (HD HHI, Samsung, Hanwha Ocean) effectively function as a global oligopoly for this product category, commanding prices well above $250 million per vessel.
Chinese yards, meanwhile, have successfully captured the mid-size and ultra-large container ship market. Between Jiangnan, Yangzijiang, COSCO Shipping Heavy Industry, and New Times, China now produces the majority of global container ship tonnage by CGT. This consolidation accelerated sharply after 2021 when the post-pandemic container freight boom triggered a massive wave of newbuilding orders, and Chinese yards offered competitive pricing, ample capacity, and shorter lead times on standard vessel types.
2. China's LNG carrier catch-up is real — but incomplete
Perhaps the most significant structural trend in the 2024–2025 order book data is China's rapid accumulation of LNG carrier contracts. Hudong-Zhonghua and Jiangnan Shipyard (both CSSC subsidiaries) now collectively hold over 9 million CGT in LNG carrier orders, a figure that would have been unthinkable five years ago. Chinese yards have benefited from a deliberate state industrial policy: domestic LNG import growth has translated into captive orders for domestically built LNG carriers, providing a learning-by-doing pathway into a product category previously dominated entirely by Korean yards.
However, Chinese yards remain constrained by several factors: limited membrane technology licensing agreements, a thinner pool of experienced LNG outfitting engineers, and a persistent perception gap among international buyers who associate Korean yards with superior quality control on complex projects. As a result, China's LNG carrier share remains predominantly domestic-buyer driven. Whether Chinese yards can break into the open-market, export-oriented LNG carrier business at scale is the key structural question for the 2026–2030 period.
3. Japan's quiet resilience — and its ceiling
Japanese yards rank third as a national group in this combined order book, with Imabari Shipbuilding, Japan Marine United, Oshima, and Mitsui E&S collectively holding significant container ship backlogs. Japan's strength is not competitiveness on unit price — Korean and Chinese yards consistently undercut Japanese quotes — but rather on reliability, fuel efficiency (Japanese yards have led in eco-ship design iterations), and niche product capabilities. The Imabari–JMU alliance is an attempt to create a national champion of sufficient scale to compete globally, but the combined entity still trails the leading Korean yards by a wide margin. Japanese yards' LNG carrier exposure remains limited, with their competence concentrated in smaller LNG bunkering vessels and coastal trade gas carriers.
4. Dual-fuel container ships: the green inflection point
One of the most consequential trends in the 2024 order book is the surge in dual-fuel (LNG-powered) container ship orders. Driven by IMO's Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) regulations, the EU Emissions Trading System's extension to maritime shipping, and customer pressure on liner operators for Scope 3 emission reductions, the majority of new large container ship orders now include an LNG fuel option. This has created an interesting dynamic: container ship orders are simultaneously driving growth in both container shipbuilding and LNG bunkering infrastructure. Yards like Yangzijiang — primarily a container ship builder — are now gaining their first exposure to gas-handling systems, a skill set that may over time support their entry into dedicated LNG carrier construction.
5. Order book concentration and systemic risk
The concentration of global LNG and container ship production in just three countries creates meaningful systemic risks. Geopolitical disruptions, energy-supply disputes, or major industrial accidents at a handful of large yards could materially disrupt global fleet renewal schedules. The 2024 partial fire at a major Korean fabrication facility — which caused a months-long delivery delay for multiple LNG carriers — was a reminder of how little redundancy exists in the high-complexity vessel supply chain. Shipping companies and their financiers are increasingly alert to this concentration risk, and some are deliberately diversifying their newbuilding orders across yards and countries where technically feasible.
What this ranking means for you — context by reader type
The order book ranking is a forward-looking indicator of shipbuilding activity, not a measure of current revenues or past performance. Its most important practical implications differ considerably depending on who is reading it.
- Ship owners and operators should read the ranking as a signal of delivery slot availability. Yards with very large order books relative to their capacity (HD HHI, Samsung) have limited near-term slots and are booking deliveries into 2028–2030. Buyers seeking early delivery must either accept higher prices at leading yards or consider second-tier Chinese and Japanese yards.
- LNG project developers and energy companies should note that the supply of new LNG carrier tonnage is now constrained primarily by shipyard slot availability and steel/equipment supply chain capacity, not by technical capability. Projects requiring dedicated shipping need to sign time-charter agreements and newbuilding contracts much earlier in the project cycle than was typical before 2020.
- Liner shipping companies (container trades) face a different dynamic: Chinese yards have ample capacity for mid-size container ships, but ULCV slots at Korean and top-tier Chinese yards remain limited. The regulatory push toward dual-fuel tonnage is adding cost and complexity to ordering decisions.
- Investors and financial analysts should treat a large order book as a double-edged signal. It represents strong revenue visibility but also execution risk: yards with backlogs extending 3–4 years face materials cost inflation, labour shortages, and the risk that vessel prices contracted today may not cover future costs.
- Policy makers and trade economists should note that the continued concentration of shipbuilding in three East Asian countries is a strategic-industries question for Europe and the United States, which currently have negligible commercial large-ship capacity. Shipbuilding capacity is a dual-use industrial base with naval implications, a consideration increasingly prominent in defence and industrial policy debates.
FAQ: common questions about LNG & container shipyard order books
What exactly is the "order book" in shipbuilding?
The order book is the total volume of ships that a yard has contracted to build but not yet delivered. A vessel enters the order book when a formal shipbuilding contract is signed and exits when it is handed over to the owner. The order book is a forward-looking indicator of production workload — it tells you how busy a yard will be over the next two to four years, not how productive it was in the past.
Why use CGT instead of number of ships or gross tonnage?
Compensated Gross Tonnage (CGT) applies a complexity coefficient to gross tonnage, so that a highly engineered LNG carrier weighs more in the ranking than a simple bulk carrier of similar physical size. This matters because different yards specialise in very different vessel types. Using raw vessel count would overstate the importance of yards that build many small ships; using gross tonnage would understate the complexity of high-tech vessels. CGT is the metric used by the OECD, Clarksons Research, and most government trade statistics for exactly this reason.
Why do South Korean yards dominate LNG carrier construction?
South Korea invested heavily in LNG carrier technology from the late 1990s onward, building up expertise in membrane cargo containment systems (licensed from French technology company GTT), cryogenic steel fabrication, and two-stroke dual-fuel engine integration. This early mover advantage compounded over time: experienced engineers trained new engineers, supplier ecosystems developed in Ulsan and Geoje, and international buyers developed trust in Korean quality standards for extremely high-value assets. Breaking this advantage requires not just capital but years of accumulated human capital — which is precisely why China's LNG carrier catch-up, while real, is still primarily concentrated in domestic-buyer orders.
Will China eventually overtake South Korea in LNG carrier construction?
This is the central industrial competition question in global shipbuilding. The trajectory suggests China will narrow the gap but may not achieve parity in complex open-market LNG carrier construction within this decade. Chinese yards are delivering LNG carriers for domestic buyers and a handful of international ones, gaining experience with each vessel. However, the GTT membrane technology licence structure, the depth of Korea's outfitting workforce, and the conservatism of energy companies and their financiers regarding unproven yards for $300 million assets all act as friction factors. By the 2030s, if Chinese yards continue on their current trajectory, the market could look more balanced — though "balanced" is relative given Korea's current lead.
What is a dual-fuel container ship and why is everyone ordering them now?
A dual-fuel container ship can burn both conventional marine fuel oil (or VLSFO) and liquefied natural gas as propellants. Burning LNG instead of conventional fuel reduces CO₂ emissions by approximately 20–25 %, eliminates sulphur oxide emissions, and significantly cuts particulate matter. Liner companies are ordering them in large numbers because the IMO's Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) regulation, effective from 2023, penalises high-emission vessels with operational restrictions, while the EU's Emissions Trading System (ETS), extended to maritime from 2024, charges shipping companies for their CO₂ emissions. LNG-fuelled vessels score substantially better on both frameworks. The surge in dual-fuel container ship orders is one reason why LNG bunkering infrastructure at major ports is expanding rapidly.
How long does it take to build an LNG carrier or a large container ship?
A large LNG carrier (174,000 m³) typically takes 28–36 months from steel cutting to delivery, depending on the yard's workload and complexity of the specific design. An ultra-large container ship (20,000–24,000 TEU) takes approximately 18–28 months. These timelines mean that ships ordered today for delivery schedules running from 2026 to 2029 are already being designed and in some cases steel-cut. At the world's busiest yards, order-to-delivery lead times have stretched toward four years as the current booking cycle has filled available slots.
What is the outlook for the order book over the next 2–3 years?
Most industry analysts project continued high LNG carrier ordering driven by new LNG export projects in North America, East Africa, and the Middle East, combined with the ongoing replacement of ageing steam-turbine LNG vessels with modern two-stroke designs. Container ship ordering is expected to moderate from 2025 peak levels as the existing order book has already added significant capacity to the global fleet, but the dual-fuel retrofit and replacement cycle will sustain a steady flow of new orders. Yard slot availability — not financing or owner appetite — is increasingly the binding constraint on order book growth for the leading shipyards.
Primary data sources and technical notes
The figures, rankings, and projections used in this article are compiled from the following publicly accessible international and industry databases. They are harmonised and lightly rounded for comparability and should be treated as analytical estimates, not as official country- or company-specific statistics.
-
Clarksons Research — Shipping Intelligence NetworkThe primary source for shipyard order book data (by vessel type, CGT, and yard), newbuilding prices, and delivery schedules. The most comprehensive commercial database for global shipbuilding activity.
https://www.clarksons.net/sinet/ -
UNCTAD — Review of Maritime Transport 2024Provides global fleet and newbuilding statistics including order book data by country, vessel type, and ownership. Official UN source for maritime trade and fleet statistics.
https://unctad.org/publication/review-maritime-transport-2024 -
Korea Shipbuilding & Offshore Engineering (KSOE) / Korea Shipbuilders' Association (KSA)Provides monthly and annual order book, delivery, and production statistics for South Korean shipyards. Used to cross-check and supplement Clarksons data.
https://www.koshipa.or.kr -
China Association of the National Shipbuilding Industry (CANSI)Official Chinese industry association publishing monthly order intake, order book, and completion data for Chinese shipyards. Primary source for Chinese yard coverage.
http://www.cansi.org.cn -
Shipbuilders' Association of Japan (SAJ)Provides annual statistics on Japanese shipyard production, orders, and completions. Used to verify Japanese yard order book figures.
https://www.sajn.or.jp/en/ -
IMO — Fourth GHG Study & CII / EEXI RegulationsBackground for the decarbonisation regulatory context discussed in the analysis, including the Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) framework and fuel-switching incentives.
https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/Pages/GHGStudies.aspx -
GTT (Gaztransport & Technigaz) — Annual ReportsProvides licensing and order intake data for LNG containment systems (Mark III, NO96), used to cross-check LNG carrier order volumes at individual yards.
https://www.gtt.fr/en/investors/publications
All numerical values in this article are approximate and rounded. For formal shipping finance, research, or investment work, readers should consult the original databases and their accompanying methodological documentation directly. Last data reference: 31 December 2024.
